Government and Politics - Cultural Purification and Discriminatory English Only Laws :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

Cultural Purification and Discriminatory English Only Laws   With continued diversity, stemming from immigration into the United States, the lyrics spoken here are continually transforming. Cultural misunderstandings and a lack of education on multi-lingualism have caused injustices inflicted on entire groups of people. Historical ideologies on what a pure American language should be has resulted in loaded English Only laws and other programs aimed at cleansing the American culture.   The language debate can perhaps be traced to John Adams proposal to the Continental copulation in 1780. The nation at that time was very culturally diverse. It was commonplace to hear as many as twenty languages spoken in passing(a) life (ACLU). Adams however, made a proposal to the Continental Congress that would significantly effect this diversity. His call to, purify, develop, and dictate, usage of the English language would have fixed stringent restriction on the employment of any ot her languages beside English. A nonher of our Founding Fathers myopic views on language and culture, discriminated against the German immigrants in the United States at the time. Benjamin Franklin, in the middle 1700s, feared the German influence could, supersede Anglo supremacy, not only in language, but in terms of culture and political value (NCBE). Thomas Jefferson espoused similar worries in 1803, in regard to the French in the Louisiana Territories. The prevailing view each of these Founding Fathers held was fear, propellight-emitting diode only by opinions that the immigrants would not be able to understand, and therefore not promote, American values.   The middle to late 1800s, saw other immigrant groups face like discrimination. The Know-Nothing Party, which was started in the 1850s, upheld anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant views. This ultimately led to language restrictions being placed on them. Due to English literary requirements, Chinese immigrants were, attacked, b arred from employment, disqualified from owning land, not allowed to vote (NCBE). Laws restricting use of German in many public schools were also passed. Ones culture and ideas becomes apparent through language. The distrustful leaders at the time though, were fearful of anything other than pure American values, and language therefore became the avenue by which they chose to promote this purity. These historical efforts to cleanse the American language have no doubt contributed to feelings on language purification by politicians today. The effect of our nations history of cultural ignorance has led to the creation of proposals that are damaging to those not yet proficient in the English language.

The Problems with Farm Subsidies :: Economy

The Problems with Farm Subsidies Subsidies are payments, economic concessions, or privileges given bythe government to favor businesses or consumers. In the 1930s, subsidieswere designed to favor agriculture. John Steinbeck expressed his dislike ofthe farm subsidy system of the United States in his book, The Grapes ofWrath. In that book, the government gave money to farms so that they wouldgrow and sell a certain amount of crops. As a result, Steinbeck argued,many people starved unnecessarily. Steinbeck examined farm subsidies from apersonal level, showing how they hurt the common man. Subsidies have avariety of other problems, both on the micro and macro level, that shouldnot be ignored. condescension their benefits, farm subsidies are an inefficientand dysfunctional part of our economic system. The problems of the American farmer arose in the 1920s, and variousmethods were introduced to help solve them. The United States stilldisagrees on how to solve the continuing proble m of agriculturaloverproduction. In 1916, the number of people living on farms was at itsmaximum at 32,530,000. Most of these farms were relatively wasted (Reische51). Technological advances in the 1920s brought a variety of effects. Theuse of machinery increased productivity while reducing the need for as manyfarm laborers. The industrial lucubrate of the 1920s drew many workers off thefarm and into the cities. Machinery, while increasing productivity,was very expensive. Demand for fare, though, stayed relativelyconstant (Long 85). As a result of this, food prices went down. The smallfarmer was no longer able to compete, lacking the capital to buy productivemachinery. Small farms lost their practicality, and many farmers wereforced to consolidate to compete. Fewer, bigger farms resulted (Reische 51).During the Depression, unemployment grew while income shrank. An extendeddrought had aggravated the farm problem during the 1930s (Reische 52).Congress, to counter this, passed price support legislation to assure aprofit to the farmers. The tarnish Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of1936 allowed the government to limit acreage use for certain soil-depletingcrops. The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 allowed thegovernment to point the minimum price and amount sold of a good at the market.The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, farmers were given price supportsfor not growing crops. These allowed farmers to mechanize, which was demand because of the scarcity of farm labor during World War II(Reische 52). During World War II, demand for food increased, and farmersenjoyed a period of general prosperity (Reische 52).